Shoshana Johnson must be seen for what she IS
-- an American soldier in a mercenary

imperialist army.Her personal motives are irrelevant.Soldiers are professional killers

Racial
Identity Politics

& the Anglo-American Mission

By Joseph
"Lil Joe" Johnson

The ideological partisanship of Americanracial identity politics manifest in the hand-wringing
over the saga of Shoshana Johnson versus
Jessica
Lynch
demonstrates how it is that "Black ethnicity identity
support" is, in the United States at any rate, part and
parcel of U.S. culture and advances the politics of U.S.
imperialism. In dispersing an appeal to come to the aid of
Johnson, an obviously innocent, though politically naïve,
writer inadvertently makes the case that Iraqis are wild (and,
according to the prevailing wisdom, evil) sand-niggers that must
be brought to heel by American troops on the ground. (See
article below.)

I respect the writer as a very sincere friend
of Nathan and Julia Hare, as he said in a previous exchange, and
as a Black revolutionary nationalist in the same tradition as
the Hares.This response is not personal.Nor, is this a personal attack on Shoshana Johnson who,
like so many other poor workers, joined the U.S. military in an
effort to "be all that you can be" -- that is to say,
she enlisted, ostensibly to learn a trade or/and further her
education.But
reality is a very harsh critic.We must be honest with one another, and respond to public
statements objectively.

African Americans are Americans who think in
ethnic terms the same as any other ethnic group in this
"nation of immigrants" – WASP [white Anglo Saxon
Protestant] Americans, Irish Americans, German Americans,
Mexican-Americans, and so on.

Shoshana Johnson must be seen for what she IS
-- an American soldier in a mercenary imperialist army.Her personal motives are irrelevant.Soldiers are professional killers.Those individuals who are enlisted in imperialist armies
are imperialist troops not some romantic abstraction, such as
“strong Black Woman.”

By doing this racial analysis of who suffers
most from the Iraqi Resistance, and is most rewarded by the
state for killing Iraqis, or suffering as a consequence of the
actions of the Iraqi resistance, we muddle the analysis.
Defining the realities in terms of who suffers most at the hands
of the Iraqi resistance, one implicitly justifies the American
military aggression and joins the invaders in representing the
Iraqis as wild savages that need to be suppressed and civilized
by American imperialism.

I know that this is not the message that the
writer wants to convey in his portrayal of the suffering of, and
rewards to, Shoshana Johnson in contrast to
Jessica
Lynch.
Nevertheless, this is the objective result. The comparison of
the experiences and rewards of Johnson and
Lynch, for killing
Iraqis, and the highlighting of disparity in compensation for
being wounded and captured, is inadvertently endorsing the
bombing campaign, military invasion and occupation. Criticism
simply on the grounds of mercenary payments gives legitimacy to
Anglo-American aggression.

I am not suggesting outright complicity. Nor
am I (at this point at any rate) attacking the writer for what
he wrote or/and posted.He
has hitherto represented himself convincingly as a conscious
Black activist critiquing racism in the United States.But this instance points out the pitfalls of American
racialism ( the politics of Blackness), that even when it is
critical of the sociological/economic discrepancies in American
democracy, it operates from the standpoint that capitalist
(bourgeois) democracy is legitimate and, therefore, that were
racism to be eliminated, capitalism and its political formation
(bourgeois democracy) would be okay.This, for instance, is the epistemological premise of the
doctrine advocating "affirmative action."

Historically, contextualized, the
abolitionist movement against slavery was ontologically and
epistemologically based in the recognition that there can be no
"equality" of chattel slaves to the slave owners.
Equality of Black (slaves) and White [owners] could become the
equality of human beings only in consequence of the abolition of
chattel slavery.The
equality of Blacks and Whites was possible even in
bourgeois-democratic capitalism but only through the social
emancipation of Negroes effectuated by the destruction of
slave-based relations of production in the economy.

Thus the black bourgeois became equal to the
white bourgeois and the workers, both black and white, became
equal in their condition of enslavement to capital. The
post-slavery relations of production are based on the economic
equality of commodity production and producers.The ideology of, and struggle for, "affirmative
action" has been nothing but the continuation of the
bourgeois democratic emancipation of Slaves, marked by the entry
of Negroes into the proletarian labor aristocracy, and the
bourgeoisie, and into what Baraka critiques as the formal
political capitalist "superstructure."

The issue of Johnson and
Lynch shows that the
objective of socioeconomic bourgeois equality is the
assimilation of Negroes into the bourgeois civil society.The capitalistic mode of exploitation, the state and the
military is not attacked and destroyed but becomes
“integrated.” This is an arrangement in which Blacks become,
along with Whites, capitalists and politicians -- oppressors.

The issue of getting busted for "Driving
while Black," for instance, is nothing but the Black
professionals and/or capitalists protest against being treated
like the lower class Blackproletariat (employed or unemployed).When unemployed homeless Black proletarians are stopped,
beaten, and arrested it is not on the 6 0'clock news, or, taken
up as cause celebre by the NAACP or even the BRC, and certainly
not by the Congressional Black Caucus!

The contrast in the treatment of Shoshana
Johnson and
Jessica Lynch, and the hoopla raised regarding this
by the Black media is a Black bourgeois issue. The issue, as
always, is money!They
do not raise the question of what Shoshana Johnson and
Jessica
Lynch were being paid to do when they were captured, nor indeed
why they were being held.They don't give a damn about the Iraqi people that both
Shoshana Johnson and
Jessica
Lynch were hired to kill, and the
country they participated in destroying.

This is not the case of the writer, of
course.But,
whether inadvertently, or, consciously, when he writes
uncritically that:

Johnson's
father, Claude Johnson, himself an Army veteran, says
that while neither he nor his family begrudge
Lynch her
celebrity or disability payments, he believes that his
daughter should get her due, and it is more than a 30
percent disability benefit." (see below)

What can we make of it?

The objective factual premise is that
Johnson, qua mercenary, killing Iraqis and destroying their
country is okay. The protest is not opposition to the killing
and destruction but the demand for equal pay for doing this
killing and destruction.Again,
while I am not clairvoyant, from what I have read from the
writer’s previous writings (including his polemics with me) I
will go on the limb and say that this ideological
pro-imperialist message is not what is intended.But this is objectively what he is arguing by arguing for
parity of Black and White killer-soldiers.

What I argue on the contrary is for
cosmopolitan proletarian class unity transcending ethnic,
gender, religious, and national barriers.The workers and farmers in the American armed forces,
rather than selfishly seeking economic advantage in striving to
"be all you can be" by killing Iraqis, should follow
the example of the Israeli worker-soldiers that refuse to kill
Palestinians and destroy theirs homes and farms.Become refuseniks!

As the troops pull out
of Iraq, Shoshana Johnson, the former prisoner of war taken
captive along with
Jessica
Lynch, describes the battles she still faces. Shoshana
Johnson joined the Army with dreams of becoming a chef. Her
plan: to cook for soldiers and earn some money for culinary
school. Five years later, she found herself lying on the
ground in Iraq, struggling to protect her head as a group of
Iraqi men kicked her repeatedly in the stomach, face, and
bullet-torn legs. She remembers their triumphant shouts.

It was the start of the
war, in March 2003, and her unit was under attack after
making a wrong turn into the city of Nasiriyah. A
30-year-old mother of a toddler at the time, Johnson became
a prisoner of war, along with four men from her unit. Two
women—Jessica
Lynch and Lori Piestewa—were captured separately. A
badly injured
Lynch
was rescued by U.S. forces nine days later. Piestewa didn’t
survive. Johnson and the men were rescued along with two
helicopter pilots after 22 days.

It was an ordeal that
Johnson, now living in her hometown of El Paso, Texas, still
struggles to put behind her, while she moves forward with
her life. As the U.S. troops pull out of Iraq, we checked
in. Interviewby Abigail Pesta:Source: TheDailyBeast

In
March of 2003, Operation Iraqi Freedom was only
days old when world headlines were rocked by the
attack on a U.S. army convoy in Iraq. On March
23rd, during the early march to Baghdad,
Shoshana Johnson was wounded in an ambush of her
convoy in the city of an-Nasiriyah and taken as
a prisoner of war. Several soldiers were killed
and five others were taken prisoner. While
Lynch
became the face associated with the capture,
Shoshana was held for several more weeks. After
the headline-making ambush, capture, and rescue,
Shoshana returned to the U.S., receiving
numerous awards for her valor, including the
Bronze Star Medal, Purple Heart Medal, and
Prisoner of War Medal. In
I’m Still Standing Shoshana writes for
the first time about her experience as a
prisoner of war, revealing emotions and
frustrations that are personal as well as
political. As a speaker, Shoshana’s warmth and
poise have earned her admirers all over the
world.
I’m Still Standingreveals the true
source of courage behind the story, the full
story she couldn’t share when she last appeared
on The Oprah Winfrey Show and Larry King Live

Johnson gained
national attention as America's first black female
prisoner of war. She was in the 507th Maintenance
Company convoy ambushed on March 23, 2003, in
Nasiriyah, and captured with five other soldiers
including
Jessica Lynch. One might call Johnson's presence
in a firefight a compound accident. She was a cook
who had enlisted in 1998 hoping to earn money for
her education and perhaps meet a nice guy, and was a
cook with the 507th, which existed to maintain
Patriot missiles. But she was sent with the convoy,
and the bullets Johnson took in both ankles did not
ask for her military occupational specialty. Though
objectively treated well enough by her Iraqi
captors, she was wounded, female, and black: three
reasons for being afraid. Rescued three weeks later
in a daring raid, Johnson emerged with a Bronze
Star, a case of post-traumatic stress disorder, and
an unwanted celebrity status sufficiently resented
by the system that she left the army. Johnson
endured her captivity with courage and emerged with
honor. With the help of former army reservist Doyle,
she vividly, simply, and unpretentiously tells her
tale.—Publishers
Weekly

Army Specialist Shoshana Johnson, the African-American woman who
was held prisoner of war in the U.S. invasion of Iraq, was
looking forward to a quiet discharge from the Army in a few
days. Battle scarred and weary, she has said not a word as her
fellow POW comrade in arms Jessica
Lynch
cashes in with book and movie deals and a celebrity status in
the media.
But it is the Army that is forcing Johnson to break her peace.
A few days ago, military brass informed her that she would
receive a 30 percent disability benefit for her injuries. Lynch,
who is White, was
discharged in August and will receive an 80 percent disability
benefit.

The difference amounts to $600 or $700 a month in payments, and
that is causing Johnson and her family to speak out. They are so
troubled by what they see as a "double standard," that
they have
enlisted Rev. Jesse Jackson to help make their case to the news
media.
Jackson, who plans to plead Johnson's cause with the White
House, the Pentagon and members of Congress, says the payment
smacks a double standard and racism.
"Here's a case of two women, same [unit], same war;
everything about their service commitment and their risk is
equal. . . . Yet there's an enormous contrast between how the
military has handled these two cases," Jackson told The
Washington Post.

Johnson's father, Claude Johnson, himself an Army veteran, says
that while neither he nor his family begrudge Lynch her
celebrity or disability payments, he believes that his daughter
should get her due,
and it is more than a 30 percent disability benefit.
For its part, the Army, in denying charges of double standard,
said Friday, that claims are awarded to soldiers according to
their injuries.
Johnson, 30, the mother of a 3-year-old daughter, was held
captive for 22 days, when her unit stumbled into an ambush in
southern Iraq last March. Eleven soldiers were killed, and six,
including Lynch and Johnson, were taken prisoners. Johnson
was shot in both legs and is still traumatized by her war
experience. In addition to walking with a limp, she suffers from
bouts of depression.

So I ask that you forward this email on to all and inform others
of this latest racial attack. Forget about the destroying of
stamps, forget about Kobe, forget about Michael Jordan getting
fired and
fight for the rights of this strong Black Woman!!!

According to the
author, this society has historically exerted
considerable pressure on black females to fit into one
of a handful of stereotypes, primarily, the Mammy, the
Matriarch or the Jezebel. The selfless
Mammy’s behavior is marked by a slavish devotion to
white folks’ domestic concerns, often at the expense of
those of her own family’s needs. By contrast, the
relatively-hedonistic Jezebel is a sexually-insatiable
temptress. And the Matriarch is generally thought of as
an emasculating figure who denigrates black men, ala the
characters Sapphire and Aunt Esther on the television
shows Amos and Andy and Sanford and Son, respectively.

Professor Perry
points out how the propagation of these harmful myths
have served the mainstream culture well. For instance,
the Mammy suggests that it is almost second nature for
black females to feel a maternal instinct towards
Caucasian babies.

As for the source
of the Jezebel, black women had no control over their
own bodies during slavery given that they were being
auctioned off and bred to maximize profits. Nonetheless,
it was in the interest of plantation owners to propagate
the lie that sisters were sluts inclined to mate
indiscriminately.

This book explodes several myths: that selling sex is completely different from any other kind of work, that migrants who sell sex are passive victims and that the multitude of people out to save them are without self-interest. Laura Agustín makes a passionate case against these stereotypes, arguing that the label 'trafficked' does not accurately describe migrants' lives and that the 'rescue industry' serves to disempower them. Based on extensive research amongst both migrants who sell sex and social helpers, Sex at the Margins provides a radically different analysis. Frequently, says Agustin, migrants make rational choices to travel and work in the sex industry, and although they are treated like a marginalised group they form part of the dynamic global economy. Both powerful and controversial, this book is essential reading for all those who want to understand the increasingly important relationship between sex markets, migration and the desire for social justice. "Sex at the Margins rips apart distinctions between migrants, service work and sexual labour and reveals the utter complexity of the contemporary sex industry. This book is set to be a trailblazer in the study of sexuality."—Lisa Adkins, University of London

Ida Mae Brandon Gladney, a
sharecropper's wife, left Mississippi
for Milwaukee in 1937, after her cousin
was falsely accused of stealing a white
man's turkeys and was almost beaten to
death. In 1945, George Swanson Starling,
a citrus picker, fled Florida for Harlem
after learning of the grove owners'
plans to give him a "necktie party" (a
lynching). Robert Joseph Pershing Foster
made his trek from Louisiana to
California in 1953, embittered by "the
absurdity that he was doing surgery for
the United States Army and couldn't
operate in his own home town." Anchored
to these three stories is Pulitzer
Prize–winning journalist Wilkerson's
magnificent, extensively researched
study of the "great migration," the
exodus of six million black Southerners
out of the terror of Jim Crow to an
"uncertain existence" in the North and
Midwest. Wilkerson deftly incorporates
sociological and historical studies into
the novelistic narratives of Gladney,
Starling, and Pershing settling in new
lands, building anew, and often finding
that they have not left racism behind.
The drama, poignancy, and romance of a
classic immigrant saga pervade this
book, hold the reader in its grasp, and
resonate long after the reading is done.